Literature notebook: study design, measurements and translation limits · RESEARCH-31198

Case 33 — A literature note that separates hypothesis from observation · source wording exercise

Correction note for “A literature note that separates hypothesis from observation”: retain the wording beginning “Keep speculation explicitly labelled and avoid translating…” in the record. If later material changes it, add the date, the changed wording and the source for that change; do not invent a completed correction here. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 34 — Correlation in a small observational dataset · source wording exercise

Summary draft for “Correlation in a small observational dataset”: the answer addresses “Association does not identify direction or causation, and…”; the related point is “Report sample size, potential confounders…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 29 — Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing? · source wording exercise

Reader check for “Two laboratories, two percentages: are they measuring the same thing?”: distinguish the discussion point “Do not subtract the two percentages as though they represented…” from its proposed application. The thread offers a way to reason about the question, without adding a personal experience or a newly observed outcome. Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 32 — Assay-specific reference ranges: what must travel with a result? · source wording exercise

Summary draft for “Assay-specific reference ranges: what must travel with a result?”: the answer addresses “A forum comparison cannot diagnose a condition; a qualified…”; the related point is “Retain units, method, laboratory interval and collection context…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 23 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible

A subgroup finding was not the primary planned analysis. How should it be summarised?

Exercise RESEARCH-31198/23: address this question within its stated limits.

Case 23 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible

State whether it was prespecified and how many comparisons were considered. Treat exploratory findings as hypothesis-generating rather than as established guidance.

Case 26 — Clinical questions in an archive discussion · source wording exercise

Summary draft for “Clinical questions in an archive discussion”: the answer addresses “Individual decisions belong with a qualified clinician who…”; the related point is “Explain the study’s scope and limitations without…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 24 — Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured

A chart caption names a mechanism but omits the observed endpoint. How can the caption be made precise?

Exercise RESEARCH-31198/24: address this question within its stated limits.

Case 33 — A literature note that separates hypothesis from observation · source wording exercise

Limit of the answer in “A literature note that separates hypothesis from observation”: “Keep speculation explicitly labelled and avoid translating…” is an excerpt from the discussion, not an independent verification. A reader needs the relevant original material before treating an interpretation as established. Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 23 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible

Method note for “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: use “State whether it was prespecified and how…” as a row heading in a proposed working record. Put the statement, its supporting source or measurement, and any unresolved detail in separate fields. This proposes a format; it supplies no additional evidence. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.

Case 25 — Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together · source wording exercise

Summary draft for “Data provenance: keep source, transformation and output together”: the answer addresses “Make synthetic examples explicit and never combine them…”; the related point is “Keep the source citation, retrieval date and a…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.

Case 24 — Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured

Clarification for “Research figure captions: tell the reader what was measured”: the point beginning “Describe the measurement, population or model,…” belongs to the question as written. It should not be read as a report that a new check, purchase or experiment has been completed. Review focus: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.

Case 23 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible

Clarification for “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: the point beginning “State whether it was prespecified and how…” belongs to the question as written. It should not be read as a report that a new check, purchase or experiment has been completed. Review focus: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.

Case 35 — Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error · source wording exercise

Two figures use different units and one axis is logarithmic. How should a comparison be documented?

Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase. Use the original answer fragment “Do not compare apparent visual distances…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.

Exercise RESEARCH-31198/35: address this question within its stated limits.

Case 23 — Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible

Limit of the answer in “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: “State whether it was prespecified and how…” is an excerpt from the discussion, not an independent verification. A reader needs the relevant original material before treating an interpretation as established. Review focus: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.